Adam & Eve and the Two Prodigal Sons: Why Has No One Compared Them?
@mythociate (21432)
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
February 12, 2013 8:40am CST
I think it's because no one has had to understand both sides this way.
You know the first Prodigal Son---the one who took his inheritance, went & wasted it all, & came back to his father's forgiveness & a feast in his honor.
But the second son went prodigal within, growing hateful over not getting his feast in reward for 'not going anywhere in the first place.'
That's like Eve & Adam: Adam might've stayed obedient, happy with the idyllic life G*d had given him; but Eve had to take MORE than was given, & Adam was forced to go prodigal within---"but G*d, this woman you gave me took the 'feast in her honor' (forbidden fruit) and gave some to me!"
Are you seeing that comparison? Am I missing any details of it?
2 people like this
4 responses
@sarahruthbeth22 (43143)
• United States
13 Feb 13
First G-d set up Adam and Eve. If He Really wanted them to remain as is, why did he plant the tree of knowledge? I always thought He sent Adam Eve but didn't Show him How to please a woman so Eve got bored and wanted to eat the apple to see what would happen.
Pure set up.
The son that remained got screwed... twice. First he loses his money and then the respect of his father. In both stories the good is punished. And they say crime doesn't pay. It doesn't pay ... for long. But it Does pay.
Pure set up.
The son that remained got screwed... twice. First he loses his money and then the respect of his father. In both stories the good is punished. And they say crime doesn't pay. It doesn't pay ... for long. But it Does pay. @mythociate (21432)
• Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
6 Mar 13
Crime DOES pay, but--sorta like you said--it COSTS WAY MORE than it pays! 
And it was the Tree of "Knowledge of Good & Evil," not the Tree of 'ALL knowledge.' Eating of that tree was more than 'just disobeying G*d,' it was giving attention to something other than G*d!
"Obey G*d" SHOULD be all the 'rules' we need to learn!
And it was the Tree of "Knowledge of Good & Evil," not the Tree of 'ALL knowledge.' Eating of that tree was more than 'just disobeying G*d,' it was giving attention to something other than G*d!
"Obey G*d" SHOULD be all the 'rules' we need to learn!1 person likes this
@sarahruthbeth22 (43143)
• United States
6 Mar 13
Any way you look at it The tree was a set up! the perfect vehicle to show men how gullible they can be when a woman is involved. A Great excuse to demean women for ions. And a way to bring destruction to the earth. After the tree business Adam and Eve go from people of the land to people On land. Perfect set up!
@mythociate (21432)
• Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
7 Mar 13
Either that, or The Sphere (from Michael Crichton's SPHERE) floated by, giving Eve the power to make Adam choose her command over G*d's 
And "demean women"? It's just as demeaning to men! that a man can be distracted into disobedience by 'shiny objects' (especially when--as many Christians believe--we were light-beings ourselves, practically gods at the time (before 'The Fall')).
And what it showed was that--no matter what we SAY--we believe in what we can sense right now more than -what we were once told (with intruding thoughts like "maybe G*d meant we couldn't eat the fruit before it was ripe; surely He wouldn't have made it look so 'good to eat' if it weren't good to eat!" etc.)
And "demean women"? It's just as demeaning to men! that a man can be distracted into disobedience by 'shiny objects' (especially when--as many Christians believe--we were light-beings ourselves, practically gods at the time (before 'The Fall')).
And what it showed was that--no matter what we SAY--we believe in what we can sense right now more than -what we were once told (with intruding thoughts like "maybe G*d meant we couldn't eat the fruit before it was ripe; surely He wouldn't have made it look so 'good to eat' if it weren't good to eat!" etc.)1 person likes this
@choconut (297)
• Philippines
28 Feb 13
the lesson for Adam and Eve is about the sinful nature of man, that we are created sinners because its already our nature as a result of the fall of Adam and Eve, but even though we are sinners He loves us. While the lesson for the prodigal son is, no matter how sinful we are and how far we run away from God, no matter how much we think of ourselves highly that we don't need God, in the end if we confess our sin and come back to God He will welcome us with an open arm and He will forgive us.
These two are somewhat similar in a sense, that it shows God's love, mercy, grace and faithfulness to man. I think you're overthink or over analyze this to a point that you're missing out the lesson.
@mythociate (21432)
• Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
6 Mar 13
I think the Prodigal Son story isn't about the one who ran away & came back as much as it's about the one who stayed but was jealous (for a season) when the runaway came back and was given the feast.
Maybe the lesson shows how Jealousy blinds us to the goodness that others can experience because of our steady, boring-ol` dependability.
@lisacope (82)
•
13 Feb 13
I haven't heard of either of these stories since I was in school, more than 10 years ago. To be honest I don't recall all the details. It's interesting to see you've noticed similarities though and if I knew the stories I'm sure I'd have an opinion to share!
It seems, from my limited memory of the stories, that "g*d" punished the emotion, not the behaviour? Taking the apple, and wasting the money, weren't done in hate. The emotion it sparked in the son and Adam though came from a place of hate, perhaps? Maybe I should go re-read the stories and find out!
@Golden90 (6)
•
13 Feb 13
That is an interesting comparison. I have two daughters that fit the story of the prodigal son. I try to do as much for one as the other even though one can survive on her own. I know that when a man with children was given a better job even though she had been faithful to the company, she was not happy. She told her boss, "Am I to be punished because I have no children.?" I do understand the bosses side in that if he wants to keep a man with children he has to give him a job that can support a family of 3 or 4 while she didn't need as much.
